Skip to main content

tv   The Daily Rundown  MSNBC  October 7, 2011 9:00am-10:00am EDT

9:00 am
having us here today. >> i brought mika a t-shirt from my neighborhood, which was destroyed by the tornado. we're building back. 69 of 70 homes building back. >> thank you so much. >> and we're aware that you watch our show every day, but it's not for mika or me. it's for the guy to the left of you. >> 4:30 a.m. >> that's right. i'm a very early person and i appreciate you being there while i'm on the treadmill. >> i'm sorry you're awake, but bless you for watching. >> thank you. >> i learned that i'm the lone voice -- >> no. >> -- in a sea of red. black and gold this weekend. >> i wore it for you! >> our whisper will become a roar saturday night. >> jerry pate, what did you learn? >> i learned that he is intense, but i learned that joe namath doesn't get out of his night clothes until after 9:00 in the morning. >> i love it. thank you very much for being here. mama jama's! if it's way too early, what time is it? >> we'll see you tomorrow
9:01 am
morning. stick around. all right, the breaking news, a modest burst of september hiring results in jobs numbers, beating expectations this morning. employers add 103,000 new jobs. by the way, remember the august goose egg? well, that didn't happen. that was revised upward. today's number, though, not a bad figure, but not enough to lower the unemployment rate. the president's top economic adviser, gene sperling, joins us from the white house this morning. also, republican legislatures in a number of states have been raising hurdles to get to the voting booth. they say the move fights fraud. as many as 5 million eligible voters may have a harder time casting their ballots in 2012. we'll have the debate ahead. and who would have thought the massachusetts senate race would get this feisty and personal this fast? elizabeth warren takes a jab at senator scott brown's claim that he had to pose nude to pay for college in 1982, but it's what scott brown said back that's
9:02 am
raising eyebrows. it's friday, october 7th, 2011. this is "the daily rundown." i'm chuck todd. let me get right to my "first read" of the morning. and let's start with the jobs numbers. employers added 103,000 jobs in september. it left the unemployment rate unchanged at 9.1%. now, the president has been pulling out all the stops to sell his jobs bill. he's been traveling to schools, bridges, rural america, plans to take another bus tour in swing states like north carolina and virginia. then, of course, the white house news conference where the president argued that his jobs bill is an insurance policy against a double-dip recession. >> what i've tried to do is say here are the best ideas i've heard, not just from partisans, but from independent economists. these are the ideas most likely to create jobs now and strengthen the economy right now. >> the president has tried a number of ways to rally public support for the bill, but polls show he's still struggling to
9:03 am
connect personally, and yesterday he lamented the limits of his own powers of persuasion. >> there may be some skepticism that i personally can't persuade republicans to take actions for the american people, but that's exactly why i need the american people to try to put some pressure on them. >> the president denied that despite the aggressive tone he's been taking with house republicans that he's interested in campaigning, a la harry truman. >> if congress does something, then i can't run against a do-nothing congress. if congress does nothing, then it's not a matter of me running against them, i think the american people will run them out of town. >> now, the different ways to improve, that the white house is trying to do to improve the president's standing on the economy takes us to the clinton brand today. secretary of state hillary clinton is guest hosting the jobs council meeting this month.
9:04 am
she does it later today. the topic is how to get foreign investment into the united states to create jobs. first time we've seen secretary of state clinton used this aggressively on a domestic issue. all right, weill a populist movement on the left help or hurt the white house? with the anti-wall street protests coming to washington, even marching past the white house gates yesterday, both the president and vice president are speaking out about them, trying to empathize with the protesters. the president at his news conference. >> i think people are frustrated, and you know, the protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works. >> and the vice president was a little more blunt when he weighed in, and he compared these protest movements happening today to the origins of the tea party movement. >> the tea party started why?
9:05 am
t.a.r.p. they thought it was unfair, we're bailing out the big guys. what are the people up there on the other end of the political spectrum saying the same thing? the middle class is being screwed. >> look, here's what everybody needs to be worried about, about these protesters and what's going on. there's a disillusionment that's taking place. you've seen it on the right in the movement, tea party movement, distrust of washington politicians, washington conservatives. you're seeing the disillusionment now popping up on the left, some distrust or disappointment with the president, the democrats in washington. that's what's dangerous about this politically for both parties, is this disillusionment. sort of, they're saying they're fed up, they're not sure what washington's going to do about it, so they're going and trying to deal with this themselves. all right, mitt romney will separate himself from the isolationist wing of the republican party at a policy
9:06 am
speech at the sit del in south carolina this morning, saying it's no time to wave the white flag. he will also say "this is america's moment. we should embrace the challenge, not shrink from it, not crawl into an isolationist shell, not wave the white flag of surrender. i will not surrender america's role in the world. this is very simple -- if you do not want america to be the strongest nation on earth, i am not your president." but according to excerpts, romney will not offer any clear direction for the war in afghanistan, instead saying he'd conduct a full review during his first 100 days in office. that's actually the same thing president obama did as candidate obama. in something of a jedi mind trick, by the way, this is not the political event you're looking for. romney's speech in south carolina coincides with the kickoff of the values voters summit in washington, where evangelic evangelical christians, who romney may eventually need to win over in the state to do well. look, at this point, it's no accident that he decided to do
9:07 am
this today, the kickoff of this thing, remind people that he's trying to run a general election campaign, a broader campaign. now, romney does speak to the group tomorrow morning. and finally, rick perry under the radar this week doing fund-raising, and we're guessing also a lot of debate prep, responded on camera for the first time to "the washington post's" story last weekend denying that a racial slur was visible on a rock outside the hunting camp that his family leased for years. here's what he said. >> i think there were some very much and strong inconsistencies and just infactual information that was in that story. i know for a fact in 1984 that rock was painted over. we painted over that rock, and it stayed that way. i have no idea where or why people would say that they had seen that rock, because that's just not the fact. >> by the way, a little big picture here on where the republican race is today. obviously, this is the week we found out who wasn't running. the field is set. it's romney, it's perry, possibly herman cain, ron paul
9:08 am
obviously still hanging in there in the polls. but is this romney's race to lose or perry's race to win? charlie cook makes a pretty powerful argument about how, actually, this is rick perry's race to win. let's put it in football terms. it's as if romney's the team that has a pretty good starting lineup, really well-coached, a great game plan, but is playing a road game. perry's the home team. think lsu, lots of talent, not the best coaching decisions, can afford a few mistakes, can overcome them. the question is, will he overcome them in time? all right, now to the developing news of the morning. 103,000 jobs added in september, leaving the unemployment rate unchanged at 9.1%. mark zandi is chief economist of moody's analytics and you have spent at least 35 minutes looking over the official report out of the labor department. >> exactly right.
9:09 am
>> take us inside the numbers. we know about the revised numbers upward in august, there wasn't a goose egg, and we know that the private sector numbers were higher than the overall jobs numbers, but what else did you see inside the report? >> pretty good if you dig deep into the data, the numbers look pretty good. hours worked per week increased, and that's a good leading indicator. businesses generally ask existing workers to work longer hours before going out to hire more people. temp jobs were up. they've been up now for three months in a row, and that's also encouraging. businesses hire temps before they hire full-timers. wages increased, you know, pretty -- it wasn't gangbusters, but not bad. so, you add it all up, people's incomes rose pretty well in september, providing the fuel for consumer spending, which is key to driving the recovery going forward. so you know, as you said earlier, it's not good enough. we need more job growth to bring down unemployment, but this does suggest the economy's moving forward. it's not in recession.
9:10 am
i'll take it. i'm relieved. it's good news. >> mark, your analysis of the president's job bill has been something that the president talks about quite a bit, but he also brought up the republican plan and what you have said or what other economists have said about it. here's what he said yesterday at his press conference, and i want to get you to respond. >> we know that this jobs bill, based on independent analysis, could grow the economy almost an additional 2%. that could mean an additional 1.9 million jobs. do they have a plan that would have a similar impact? because if they do, i'm happy to hear it, but i haven't heard them offer alternatives that would have that same kind of impact, and that's was we need right now. >> so, mark, what is your analysis of these republican alternatives, the ones that particularly focus on regulations?
9:11 am
>> well, republican proposals -- and there are a number -- trade bill, patent bill, deregulation, some ideas around energy. you know, they're not bad as long-term economic policy. i don't think they mean much for the economy, though, in the near term, not certainly for the next 6, 12, 18 months. and i think that's where i'm most concerned and focused. you know, the risks of recession, despite today's jobs numbers, is still very, very high, given what's going on in europe, given the decline in stock prices here, given the foreclosure crisis and the decline in housing values. we have to work really hard to avoid going back into recession, because if we go back into recession now in the next 6, 12 months, our budget deficit's going to balloon out, it's going to undermine tax revenue, government spending's going to increase just automatically, you know, through all the automatic stabilizers in the budget. so, we've got to avoid that. and so, i think i would agree with the president that we need to take some steps, most notably
9:12 am
extending and expanding the payroll tax holiday for employees, as proposed, to make sure we don't go back into recession as an insurance policy. now, the republican proposals are fine. i think, you know, they're good policy longer run. we need to focus on things like on trade and patent protection and deregulation, but that's not going to help us quickly in the very near term. >> without major action by congress on parts of the president's proposal, what's your estimation of going into a double dip? >> i think if policymakers do nothing here, if congress and the administration just sit on their hands and they do nothing, the odds are very high we'll go into recession early next year because tax rates are going up. we have a payroll tax holiday, all of us. you and i have a payroll tax holiday this year. that's a lot of money. and in fact, it went in to paying for those higher gasoline bills because of the surge in energy prices earlier in the year. we'd be in recession right now without it.
9:13 am
so, i think if they don't do that, at the very minimum, we'll likely go into recession. >> all right, mark zandi of moody's analytics. mark, always good to have your take first thing after these jobs numbers come out. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> later in the show, i will talk to the white house's chief economist, gene sperling, about the report. now, partisan tensions boiled over in the senate last night when democrats invoked the so-called nuclear option, changing the rules to bypass republicans and avoid two difficult roll call votes, including one on the president's jobs bill as written by the president, which is still unpopular with some members of the democratic party. the move could forever change some senate traditions. party leaders took their frustrations out on the floor last night. it was ugly. watch. >> am i 100% sure that i'm right? no, but i feel pretty comfortable with what we've done. there has to be some end to the dillatory tactics to stop things. my friend, the republican leader, as candid as he was,
9:14 am
says his number one goal is to defeat president obama, and that's what's been going on for nine months. >> the fundamental problem here is the majority never likes to take votes. that's the core problem. the price of being in the majority is you have to take bad votes, because in the united states senate, the minority is entitled to be heard, not entitled to win, but entitled to be heard. >> kelly o'donnell is nbc news capitol hill correspondent. you know, every time we've talked about something that's happened in the senate between reid and mcconnell, we say, boy, this is the new low point in the history of the united states senate. new low point, huh? >> reporter: well, this was really one of those gasp-worthy moments, because this happened into the evening last night after dinner, after most people had kind of called it a day, and there was this protracted fight. that was just a moment of it, where you had members of the senate who rarely get up and talk on the floor who were each participating in this, and it really is important because both
9:15 am
sides say they revere the rules of the senate. why is that so important? because everybody likes to have a predictable set of rules to fight out these political battles. and what happened is, harry reid, democrat in charge of the senate, pulled a surprise move, got other democrats to vote against the call of the referee, if you will, known as the parliamentarian, to shut down republicans who did want to take a political vote, wanted to force the senate to do what the president has asked, vote on his jobs bill. that's not popular with democrats. they're already retooling it, putting in some different ways to pay for it, so they didn't want to take that vote. that's the backdrop of this. but the bigger issue going forward is you just don't see the senate up and change its own rules. that's really wrangled people. so, there were heated noemts terms of the way the senate behaves when they get their kind of fuming moments, pacing on the floor. that really stands out, that's unusual. so, if you think about this as, you know, you love sports analogies -- so you know, you're allowed to kind of run down the
9:16 am
clock if you're the minority party. you're allowed to slow things down. people don't like it necessarily, but you're allowed. harry reid decided to change those rules and there will be fallout for a lot of time to come. >> the unintended consequence of this action long term hit on the senate. >> reporter: yes. >> kelly o'donnell in our washington newsroom, kelly, thanks so much. new laws could make it much tougher for millions of people to vote in the 2012 presidential election. critics say it's an intent to disenfranchise democrats, particularly minorities and the poor. up next, the impact on who wins the white house. and as i mentioned, the white house responds to the september jobs report. top economic adviser to the president, gene sperling, will be here. first, a look ahead at the president's schedule today. ditka. ditka and obama in the same room. it's going to be good stuff. the '85 bears coming to town. you're watching "the daily rundown" on msnbc. ♪ [ male announcer ] with any good workout there comes a little soreness.
9:17 am
9:18 am
i'm sore. use new bengay cold therapy, the only one with pro-cool technology that relieves pain with a blast of cold. it's the same technology used by physical therapists and chiropractors. first, the revolutionary pro-cool technology penetrates the skin releasing an army of snowmen masseuse who cuddle up with your soreness during an ice-sculpting contest mc'ed by a figure skating yeti. all with a vanishing scent. technology. [ male announcer ] new bengay cold therapy. the same technology used by physical therapists. go to for a $3 coupon.
9:19 am
9:20 am
with millions of legal voters face new obstacles getting to the polls in the 2012 elections? new election laws in several states may raise barriers for up to 5 million qualified voters. republican legislatures say the new rules will secure the election process and fight voter fraud. critics say the measures will hit the poor and minorities the hardest and say there wasn't any fraud to stop. john fund is editor of "the american spectator" and author of "stealing elections: how voter fraud threatens our democracy." and michael waldman is the executive director of the brennan center for justice, who just did a report about these new laws, saying that they're going to provide new barriers. so, gentlemen, let me start with you.
9:21 am
john fund, let me start with you. where is the crisis in voter fraud taking place? >> well, about 40% of americans tell pollsters that they do not have confidence in the integrity of our elections. either they believe that there are people prevented from voting or an equal number or more believe that there is potential fraud and actual fraud, and sometimes they actually believe their vote isn't properly counted. so, 40% of the american people believe there is a serious problem affecting the integrity and the accuracy of our elections. >> okay, but let me just follow up. whether they believe it or not, is it taking place? where's the evidence that there has been this rash of voter fraud? >> well, a few weeks ago, an official in mississippi was sentenced to five years in prison for voting ten times, double voting in the names of other people. we've had other voter fraud incidents all over the country. i can cite you examples from pennsylvania, i can cite examples from indiana, compton california, bell, california,
9:22 am
which led to that city's incredible pensions scandal because the city council passed those corrupt pension increases was elected through voter fraud. >> michael, let me go to you. what's wrong with passing a law that says you have to show an i.d. to vote? >> there's nothing wrong per se with saying that people should have to show some kind of i.d. or some way of showing who they are. nobody wants voter fraud. but you're exactly right, that there is not a sin tilla of evidence of massive voter impersonation, which is the kind of thing that those voter i.d. laws requiring a driver's license, basically, government i.d., requires. the problem is not voter i.d., it's requiring forms of identification that lots of our fellow citizens don't have. look, i've got a driver's license, you've got a driver's license, but about one in ten of our fellow citizens don't, and it's very political, really, clearly targeted, these laws, in a way that hurts minorities and others. and a great example is in texas,
9:23 am
where governor rick perry just signed a law saying you could not use your university of texas photo i.d. as i.d., but you could use your gun license. you know, this week in "the new york times," the official at the heritage foundation admitted, he said there's no massive voter fraud. everybody knows that. nobody says there is, but that's exactly what's justifying these laws. >> but michael, let me -- you know, a lot of times, we will get upset when we find out something, a law gets broken or fraud takes place on any number of things, and we say, boy, why wasn't there a tighter restriction at the time? so, why not try to close the loophole before somebody truly does try to take advantage of it? >> well, there are all kinds of good ways to make our elections get better and they're a mess in a lot of ways. we have to modernize our voter registration system so that more eligible people, but only eligible people, are on the voter rolls. i think that's the kind of thing people of all political views
9:24 am
ought to be able to work together on. we ought to be able to do all kinds of things to improve our democracy, but these laws, which are rushed through this year for the first time when the party control of the state legislatures changed in a lot of places, is very political. it's not really -- it's not going at the real problem. it seems, at least, to have a special impact on minority and young and poor voters, and that will affect up to 5 million people in this election. >> hey, john fund -- and i know this is a little bit of maybe a tough question for you to answer as a conservative and a believer in not having too much federal power, but shouldn't there be some more nationalized standards, more so than we have today, so that you don't have these uneven laws all over the country? >> well, actually, that's what a presidential commission headed by former president jimmy carter and former secretary of state james baker said in 2005, and that was a bipartisan commission report calling for photo i.d. look, if photo i.d. discriminates against minorities, they clearly don't
9:25 am
believe that. 63% in a gallup poll of african-americans, 77% of hispanics support having people show photo i.d. at the polls. and as for texas not showing, not allowing a student i.d. to be used as an identification, there's a good reason for that. remember what governor perry's being beaten up on. he's being beat up for having illegal immigrants attend texas universities using instate tuition. well, if they can attend texas universities, they can get an i.d., but they shouldn't vote because they're not citizens. >> well, let me ask you this. some of the changes, john fund, have been in getting rid of early voting, same-day registration -- >> changing the rules. >> i understand, but why not make it -- i guess, why isn't the push for reform on this saying we want more identification and easier ways to register to vote? >> look, the real problem, i agree, is absentee voter fraud. that's the tool of choice for voter fraud. early voting is a good idea, but you don't want to expand it so much so that you lose the focus on election day. remember, we have election day for a reason, everybody coming
9:26 am
together and rendering the same decision at the same time. early voting is useful, but some places, like maine, allow it way in advance. some people have early voting before the debates are even over. i think the status of an election should be people should have as much information as possible, and certainly, they shouldn't be voting before the debates are over. >> michael, what do you say to that? >> one of the laws that's going to cut back on voting rights was in maine, where they eliminated election day registration where you need to show an i.d., by the way, to register on election day. let's be clear, not a single one of these laws actually deals with absentee voter issues. >> that's not true. kansas does -- >> every one of them deals with people -- [ everyone talking at once ] >> that's not true. >> and having new obstacles that simply didn't exist. and let's be clear, nobody wants fraud, but this idea that there's a lot of fraud -- i agree with the gentleman from the heritage foundation. i haven't heard a response. there is no massive fraud. there is no stealing of america's elections. let's make it easier for everybody to vote. nobody should vote if they aren't allowed to vote. there are plenty of
9:27 am
common-sense, non-partisan, bipartisan ways to make that happen, but these partisan laws really seem aimed very much at specific constituencies, and it's very bad for our democracy. >> john fund, since he asked you to respond to the heritage foundation quote about that, respond. >> former president jimmy carter supported a national voter i.d. the rhode island legislature, which is 5-1 democratic in both houses, just passed a photo i.d. the sponsor was the only african-american senator in that state. the sponsor in the state house there was the african-american speaker of that body. this 63% of african-americans support photo i.d. at the polls. so, michael is chasing opposition which isn't out there. >> chuck, there's nothing wrong with the rhode island law. and if that were the law that's being pushed through these other states, we wouldn't be having this conversation. there are lots of forms of i.d. you can use in rhode island, not just one that people don't have. >> i've got to end it here. john fund, michael, both of you very knowledgeable on this topic
9:28 am
and it's why i wanted you both on. thank you very much for coming on. up next, how will wall street react to the new jobs numbers? we'll get a market preview next. plus, we're live in kabul. it's the tenth anniversary of the war in afghanistan, ten years. the fight, the sacrifice and where the conflict goes from here. on a lighter note, a dressing down in the massachusetts senate race, or actually had to do with not dressing. scott brown's past as a centerfold is back in the headlines. did he get the last laugh or cringe? first, today's trivia question -- what is the oldest committee of congress? first correct answer will get a follow friday from us. the answer coming up.
9:29 am
9:30 am
9:31 am
wall street's had about an hour to digest the latest jobs report. the opening bell just rang, so what's ahead for the trading day
9:32 am
in cnbc's brian shackman has the rundown. >> we're positive on the dow and s&p 500. if we're positive for the day, it will be four days in a row. in fact, we've had triple-digit gains in the dow three straight days. no news is good news out of europe is helping, but the big numbers, that jobs report, 103,000 is the gain, but private sector was 137,000, and the big takeaway here, because the unemployment rate is steady at 9.1%, is that it's better than expected, but it's still not good enough to bring down, of course, that unemployment rate. you need 150,000 to 200,000 gains a month to actually do that. so, it's a surprise to the up side but not a shock surprise. and so, right now we do see some gains in the markets. back to you. >> thank you, brian.
9:33 am
it was ten years ago today that the u.s. launched the first military strikes in afghanistan after . after a decade of war, president obama is beginning to draw down american forces with the goal of pulling all combat troops out by the end of 2014. the american public is sometimes numb, i think, to the fact that this is america's longest war. and while they can look forward to it looking like it's going to be wound down, is there going to be any sense of victory as troops leave? >> well, that's an interesting way to put it as well, chuck,
9:34 am
because it is america's longest w war, but when you talk to analysts and experts, they'll say the ten-year war has actually been a two-year war, because when the community came in in 2001, the focus was on afghanistan, but come 2003, the focus shifted to iraq. afghanistan quickly became known as the forgotten war, and that's when the situation deteriorated here. it wasn't until 2009 when president obama shifted the focus back to afghanistan where there was a real agenda, a real mission here in the war in afghanistan. but as you mentioned, they will be pulling the troops out. they want all combat troops out by the end of 2014, and many people here in afghanistan, many people who know the situation in afghanistan wonder if that's going to be enough time. for america, it has been ten years. for the afghan people, it has been ten years. but for the actual mission, it's only been a few years. and right now, to train the
9:35 am
afghan security forces to take care of their own country, many people say it will take much longer than just to the end of 2014. >> and atia, let me ask you this question. in talking to some high-level, former pakistani officials, they say one -- they weren't trying to make an excuse for the isi, but they were saying one of the reasons the pakistanis are suddenly looking like less of an ally to the united states on some days is that they are the most concerned about the u.s. withdrawing because they don't believe the u.s. is going to be leaving a stable afghanistan. >> reporter: that's absolutely right. it's not just the pakistanis who feel that way, it's the afghan people who feel that way, too. when you go into the cities, you get a completely different perspective. you talk to afghans here who have seen changes in the last ten years, but when you go to the majority of afghanistan, rural villages and districts and provinces, they'll tell you that in the last ten years, they haven't seen much difference,
9:36 am
they've seen an increased insurgency, they see the taliban coming back. and guess what? the afghans have turned more and more towards the taliban, not necessarily because they want the taliban back in power, but because they're afraid that once the international community leaves, that they're going to be the ones left to deal with the taliban. and if they have by any means had a relationship with the coalition forces or the afghan government, they're afraid that they're going to be punished by the taliban when they feel that they will be abandoned by the international community. >> one last question, atia, and i ask you this simply because you've spent so much time there over the years. does the pakistani government believe the karzai government in kabul is an ally? >> reporter: that's a very complicated question, chuck, and it's a very good question. because when you look at the relationship with the karzai administration and when it comes to the pakistani government, when it even comes to the u.s.
9:37 am
government, although they'd like to make it seem out in the front that they are friends, that they are allies, there's a lot of tensions. there have been tensions for some time now. president karzai and the afghan government has been pointing the finger at the pakistani government and the pakistani intelligence, the isi, for many years now, saying that they're the problem, that the war shouldn't be in afghanistan until the situation is dealt with in pakistan because they say nothing in afghanistan will improve until the situation in pakistan is dealt with. so, although they want to make the relationship seem very friendly, there are very big tensions in the back. >> all right. atia abaw think kabul for us. always nice to talk with you. well, the vice president is now the latest from team obama to call the president the underdog heading into 2012. >> the american people are dissatisfied for the state of the nation at the moment. that all by itself is enough to
9:38 am
make you the underdog. >> is it strong enough of a republican party for its nominee to beat this president? >> oh, absolutely, absolutely. it's strong enough to beat both of us. >> msnbc political analyst michele bernard is president of the bernard center for women, politics and public policy. and covering politics for roll call and mr. shakir is vice president of the center for american progress. welcome, all of you. faz, let me start with you. what do you think of joe biden's very blunt assessment of 2012? >> well, i think it's clear that president obama's struggling right now, but i think as the contest heats up and you've got a republican contender to pit himself off against, he's going to benefit from that, but i think that it's more important for him to focus on his jobs plan. i think that's the message that the american people want to hear about, and i think the impetus for the jobs plan is now renewed with the new jobs numbers, because i think it shows that if we're going to turn around some of our struggling economic
9:39 am
sectors, particularly the government employees, teachers, firemen, police officers, those are the people who actually stand to benefit a great deal from the jobs plan. i think it shows that we need to move on it. >> if there was one striking thing about the week when it comes to obama/biden, it's how they both so easily are now saying this is not going to be easy, but biden also said something else. he said, you know what, it's going to be a choice. well, that's also code for this is going to be a knockdown, drag-out election. because you know why we're calling it a choice? because we're going to make the other choice seem pretty unelectable. >> and i think his words were another way also of saying give me your money. this is a really good way to fund-raise with the base. ring the warning bell, i think we might lose this one. this is a great way for president obama and joe biden to subtly say, okay, guys, we need some cash, let's start bringing it in. >> now, john boehner tried to say everything the president's doing is campaign mode when it comes to this jobs bill. here's how he put it yesterday. >> i made it clear to my
9:40 am
colleagues, when i don't have 218 frogs in the wheel barrow at one time, i don't have the strongest hand that i could have. they want more change. they need it faster. and i don't disagree with them. i try to get as much as i can, but i want to be able to move the ball down the field on behalf of the american people. >> that was him talking about his house caucus, but it was another quote i wanted to highlight, when he was saying that the president is simply in campaign mode. well, there's an argument to be made here because he's got to campaign in order to get people, in order to see if he can get congress to use, get political motivation to get the jobs bill done. >> let's assume he's not in campaign mode. what the president -- the president's message is an important message, it is a message that the american public needs to hear. so, from my perspective, he's in campaign mode, but he's also governing. the difference is, we're seeing a very different candidate obama and a governing president obama than we saw in 2008 and even different than what we saw just
9:41 am
a few months ago. he's stronger, the tone and tenor of his rhetoric is much stronger, and i think that that is something the american public needs to see and feel in order to have confidence. i, for example, don't feel it engenders a lot of confidence to have the president and the vice president say, although i'm the president of the united states, i'm the underdog. i don't know that the public -- >> you think that's bad to say. >> i think that's bad to say. i think the public needs to feel that this is a man who's in charge, he knows what he's doing, he understands that the pain that the 14 million unemployed americans today are feeling and that he knows how difficult it is, but he's in charge and he's going to find a way to turn things around. >> you know, faiz, seems to me there's a fine line between, you know, not looking like your head's in the sand. >> right. >> you want to look, you know, you want to look like you're at least talking straight to the people, you don't look like you're living in some la la land. at the same time, you also don't want to give off a sense of doom and gloom. >> well, do you remember the unnamed republican aide who talked to politico just a few
9:42 am
weeks ago and said obama's on the ropes, why do we want to give him convict snraey i think that summarizes the state of play. if you have a republican party who's made a political calculation that we're not going to hand obama a victory, they're playing politics. i appreciate john boehner saying, oh, president obama's campaigning. what else do you expect him to do? if that's your strategy, obama's got to campaign for his jobs plan. he's got to draw a contrast and he's got to say you're wrong and i'm right. >> you've spent a lot of time on capitol hill covering. do you get a sense there is any nervousness, go one step below the leadership levels of the republicans in the senate and house, nervousness that they could get more blame for this, for the gridlock in washington than it appears today? >> absolutely. i think the rank in file of house democrats in particular are, they're very nervous right now. look, there's 16 blocks between the white house and capitol hill. it might as well be miles right now. there's just a lot of distance between those two camps. >> you mean house republicans? >> house republicans, sorry. >> okay. >> and i think there's a lot of concern in that regard.
9:43 am
>> all right. i want to move to a lighter topic. we knew the massachusetts senate race was going to be a fairly -- >> interesting? >> -- interesting affair between potentially elizabeth warren, who has to get through her primary, and scott brown. but there was a back-and-forth about the idea of scott brown having to pose nude to pay for college, elizabeth warren's response and then scott brown's response to the response. take a listen. >> to help pay for his college, law school education, scott brown posed for "cosmo." how did you pay for your college education? >> i kept my clothes on. [ laughter ] >> have you officially responded to elizabeth warren's comment about how she didn't take her clothes off? [ laughter ] >> thank god. [ laughter ] >> michele bernard, is a fine line between being jocularity, obviously on a radio show, looser character, but also
9:44 am
sounding sexist. >> you know, he sounded sexist, but i take both comments with a grain of salt. i know there are a lot of women's groups outraged by the comments that he made, but i think both of them were laugh lines for elizabeth warren and for scott brown. and quite frankly, his personal story is one that is very captivating for anyone who's listened to him, who's read the book, who's read his life story. i think you just kind of take it with a grain of salt and let bygones be bygones. >> you know, what struck me about it is you do get the sense that maybe elizabeth warren's gotten under scott brown's skin a little bit. he's certainly thinking about her when he thinks this re-election isn't going to be easy. >> i think if scott brown's watching poll numbers, he knows she's gained on him in the last couple weeks. look, i don't think this will be a huge deal in a senate contest and i think she'll probably win the democratic nomination, so 12 months from now, i don't think it will be a big deal, but i think it underscores a lot of things in the race right now. >> describe the sentiment there is in the liberal community when it comes to elizabeth warren. >> well, a champion against fighting against wall street. look at the occupy wall street
9:45 am
protests. she is the champion of that movement. she was there before the occupy wall street movement and ihink she's probably the biggest icon who stands for what they stand for. >> and there could be a lot i hear, the fund-raising that may come with her will show what sort of national following warren has. stick around. gene sperling is coming up. up next, the obama administration responds to the just-released september jobs numbers. gene sperling of the national economic council joins us. and this sunday on nbc's "meet the press," an exclusive interview with the president's former chief of staff, chicago mayor rahm emanuel. house committee chairman paul ryan will also be david gregory's exclusive guest. that's sunday on "meet the press," a special edition from chicago. check your local listings. by the way, as we go to break, soup of the day. bringing something more interesting, coconut crab. it's, you know, i'm not a fan of coconut, but at least it's unique. you're watching "the daily rundown" only on msnbc. i don't want healthy skin for a day.
9:46 am
i want healthy skin for life. [ female announcer ] don't just moisturize, improve the health of your skin with aveeno daily moisturizing lotion. the natural oatmeal formula goes beyond 24-hour moisture. it's clinically proven to improve your skin's health in one day, with significant improvement in 2 weeks. for healthy, beautiful skin that lasts. i found a moisturizer for life. [ female announcer ] aveeno daily moisturizing lotion. and for healthy, beautiful hair, try nourish plus haircare. only from aveeno. i took some steep risks in my teens. i'd never ride without one now. and since my doctor prescribed lipitor, i won't go without it for my high cholesterol and my risk of heart attack. why kid myself? diet and exercise weren't lowering my cholesterol enough. now i'm eating healthier, exercising more, taking lipitor. numbers don't lie. my cholesterol's stayed down. lipitor is fda approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease.
9:47 am
it's backed by over 19 years of research. [ female announcer ] lipitor is not for everyone, including people with liver problems and women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications, or if you have any muscle pain or weakness. this may be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. [ man ] still love that wind in my face! talk to your doctor. don't kid yourself about the risk of heart attack and stroke. if lipitor's been working for you, stay with it. lipitor may be available for as little as $4 a month with the lipitor co-pay card. terms and conditions apply. learn more at have given way to sleeping. where sleepless nights yield to restful sleep. and lunesta can help you get there, like it has for so many people before. when taking lunesta, don't drive or operate machinery until you feel fully awake. walking, eating, driving, or engaging in other activities while asleep, without remembering it the next day, have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation,
9:48 am
hallucinations or confusion. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. alcohol may increase these risks. allergic reactions, such as tongue or throat swelling, occur rarely and may be fatal. side effects may include unpleasant taste, headache, dizziness and morning drowsiness. ask your doctor if lunesta is right for you. then get lunesta for $0 at there's a land of restful sleep. we can help you go there on the wings of lunesta. ♪ [ multiple sounds making melodic tune ] ♪ [ male announcer ] at northrop grumman, every innovation, every solution, comes together for a single purpose -- to make the world a safer place. that's the value of performance.
9:49 am
northrop grumman. democrats have a new plan to pay for the president's jobs bill, a tax that would just hit americans making $1 million or more. gene sperling is director of the national economic council. he joins me now. let me first get you to react to these jobs numbers. how do you describe this jobs report? good, mediocre, bad, what's your description? >> better than expected but not nearly good enough, not nearly what we need, not when we are still digging out of the worst recession since the great depression, not when we still have 9.1% unemployment and a lot of fragility in the global economy. the president, as you heard him say yesterday, does not believe there is any excuse or reason that anyone in washington should be sitting on their hands and
9:50 am
doing nothing. we ought to be acting, passing the american jobs act, first as an insurance policy against a potential double-dip recession or stalling of this economy, but more hopefully and more probably as a way of of getting this rec take hold. and chuck, you've seen -- you've seen that top economic forecasters has estimated this job plan would create 1.9 million more jobs, macroeconomic advisors predict 1.3 million more jobs. when asked yesterday, their answer was nothing, they couldn't even score it. so a real question and a real challenge to the republican leadership is, where, if they do not support the american jobs act, where is their plan these same independent forecasters would evaluate as helping to create up to 1.9 million jobs? we're still waiting. the right thing to do is take
9:51 am
action now. >> gene, yesterday the president said he was comfortable with the new way senate democrats want to pay for the jobs bill, this surtax on millionaires, but he seemed to be cautiously about it. explain why it seems to be cautious comfort that the president has for paying this, he doesn't think this is the best way? >> i think the president is quite comfortable and supportive of the senate democratic alternative. it is consistent with his values and priorities, which are first and foremost to pass the american jobs act and get construction workers, teachers back working, tax cuts to the small businesses, but it's also done in a way that is part of our overall shared sacrifice. i think what he's also said, chuck, and he's said it from the beginning, the best way to do this would be tax reform, where we lower everyone's rates, where
9:52 am
we still raise the revenues and have debt stainability as long as we had something like the buffett rule that ensured when we're taking rates down, we don't let those at the very highest levels end up paying less than tens of millions of hard working families. >> gene, i got to get you back on, because i'm getting squeezed by time. gene sperling, i'm going to bug you next week. we'll be right back.
9:53 am
9:54 am
9:55 am
well, everything got squeezed a little bit today thanks to the white house being a little bit late, so we have to rap up. what is the oldest committee of congress? the answer is the house ways and means committee, of course, the one dealing with taxes is the oldest committee, right? quickly, i'll give you a shameless plug time. >> national women's history museum, go to the website, november 2011, we want to see everybody there. >> you guys had a great segment
9:56 am
earlier about voting rights issue, we sat down with the assistant attorney general, story's out monday at roll call. in the passing of steve jobs, american progress is hosting a conference next week on the next great american idea, great ideas of the past, and the future. >> my shameless plug, i don't want to say it's shameless, all my jewish friends out there and family, have an easy fast. see you back here on monday. coming up next, "jansing & co.," then at 1:00, "andrea mitchell reports." walmart have teamed up to bring you a low-priced medicare prescription drug plan. ♪ with the lowest national plan premium... ♪ ...and copays as low as one dollar... ♪ ...saving on medicare prescriptions is easy. ♪ so you're free to focus on the things that really matter.
9:57 am
call humana at 1-800-808-4003. or go to for details.
9:58 am
9:59 am
good friday morning, i'm chris jansing, and the new jobs numbers are out. they are better than what economists were expecting. the labor department says 103,000 jobs were added last month, though for the third month in a